fbpx
Donate Newsletters

Collection: A Crackdown on Coal Dust

Coal Dust Threatens Cascadia’s Water and Wildlife

by

On the West Coast, proposed coal terminal developments would potentially threaten some of the North America’s most iconic and sensitive bodies of water, including the Fraser River, the Salish Sea, the Columbia River, and San Francisco Bay. Yet understanding the magnitude of the risk is challenging because there is little scientific research into the effect … Read more

Coal Trains Mean Coal Dust—Period

by

So much coal dust escapes from the open-top rail cars used for transporting coal that it can create safety problems for rail traffic. Coal dust deposits sometimes cause spontaneous fires, and in 2005, for example, coal dust that had accumulated in ballast, the layer of crushed rock that supports rail tracks, caused derailments. Given the … Read more

Event: Health Risks of Northwest Coal Exports

by

Next Tuesday, Sightline’s policy director Eric de Place will join University of Washington-Bothell’s Dr. Dan Jaffe and PeaceHealth’s Dr. Divya Bappanad to discuss the health risks of coal export proposals in the Northwest. Together, they will take a look at the proposed Millennium Bulk Terminal that would bring 44 million tons of coal in uncovered, open-top rail cars … Read more

From Montana to the Coast, Coal Dust Threatens Human Health

by

Update 4/4/16: The Gateway Pacific Terminal project has requested a temporary suspension of the proposal’s environmental review process. If the coal industry gets its way, the Columbia River Gorge will soon host dozens of loaded coal trains each day, carrying as much as 96 million tons annually to export terminals in Washington. It’s an amount of coal … Read more

Dust Up

by

Amid all the debate about the risk of coal trains spreading coal dust into areas near the railroad tracks, it’s often forgotten that the subject is controversial even within the industry. How to control coal dust—or whether it can be done at all to a meaningful degree—has been the subject of a long-running dispute between those who ship the coal and those who carry it. The coal companies or utilities that ship the coal are on one side and the railroads that carry it are on the other.

The controversy developed originally not because either side was concerned about the spread of coal dust into neighboring communities or rivers, but because coal dust accumulation had become so severe in places that it actually destabilized tracks, resulting in derailments or trackside fires. In response, the railways began levying fees on the coal shippers to cover the costs of treating the coal with a chemical spray designed to reduce dust emissions. The coal shippers objected, arguing that the fee was unfair and that the coal dust control techniques are ineffective.

The result was a years-long battle before a federal regulatory agency, the US Surface Transportation Board (STB). It was finally resolved in December 2013 when the STB ruled mostly in favor of the railways—the government denied the fee, but instead allowed the railways to require coal shippers to undertake the dust-reduction techniques the railways wanted. (The ruling is here.) The legal arcana may be of little interest outside law firms, but the research results that supported the decision are relevant to everyone with a stake in the coal exports debate.

The STB relied on the findings of a seven-month experiment called the Super Trial designed to answer some of the persistent questions about how effective coal dust suppression techniques really are. Although the government concluded that it is possible for shippers to substantially reduce coal dust, the research findings also leave open several major worries, among them:

  • Coal dust from empty railcars, which may emit as much dust as loaded cars and which are never treated to reduce dust.
  • Coal dust reduction techniques may not be effective at high speeds or over long distances.
  • The studies tell us little about the extent of very small particle emissions, which may be the most risky to human health.
  • Much of the methodology and results are proprietary, making them hard to evaluate.

It’s worth taking a closer look at the STB case because the answers can help us glean important information about what large-scale rail shipping would mean for coal dust in the Pacific Northwest.

Read more

Coal Dust in Communities

by

If you want more evidence that coal operations equate to uncontrolled coal dust, take a gander at this new collection of stories about what it’s like to live near a coal terminal. In communities near big terminals in Maryland and Virginia, coal dust is commonplace. As one Baltimore resident tells it: Coal dust and soot … Read more

Coal Goes Off the Rails

by

It’s been a rough summer for coal trains.

There have already been at least 6 major headline-grabbing derailments, at least one of which was fatal. Then observers in the Columbia River Gorge snapped damning photos of coal trains passing through Columbia Hills State Park in Washington.

Here’s one:

(Photo credit: Columbia Riverkeeper)

That black cloud billowing above the train is almost certainly coal dust.* One would hope that photos like this should put to rest the coal industry’s nonsense that the shipments are clean. Clearly, there are direct and harmful impacts.

Many more photos are available on Columbia Riverkeeper’s Facebook page.

The coal dust was hardly the most egregious recent problem in the Northwest. That honor was taken on July 2 when a coal train derailed near the town of Mesa in eastern Washington; 31 overturned railcars spilled an estimated 6 million pounds of coal.

Read more

Railroad Union Stretches Truth About Coal Dust

by

In a recent advocacy piece, a spokesman for a prominent railroad union made the following rather astonishing claim:

Trains carrying coal have been traveling through Western Washington on their way to Canadian ports for decades, yet the Northwest Clean Air Agency and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency have no record of coal dust complaints.

For decades, really? In the context it’s made—in support of plans to export huge volumes of coal—that’s a claim so deceptive it’s about an inch away from a lie.

The federal government closely tracks cross-border coal shipments of coal. Here’s what the past 15 years looks like:

 

The coal plans for the Cherry Point facility alone are so huge that they render the past decades of coal shipments virtually unidentifiable.

Now, strictly speaking, it is true that the trains have been carrying coal through western Washington to Canada. But until the last couple of years, the volumes have been positively tiny. When I say “tiny” I mean that for many years just a few dozen rail cars with coal passed that way, or maybe a single short coal train. Not more.

Read more

Coal Dust in South Africa

by

South Africa is a major coal exporter and home to the world’s largest coal export terminal, located at Richards Bay on the country’s east coast. It’s no secret that the coal terminal is a major source of local pollution. As one academic journal article characterizes the situation:

The coal operations, which include stockpiles, shunting, conveyor belts and shiploading, create dust which is a major problem in the harbour and surrounding areas as it tends to coat all exposed surfaces.

Not surprisingly, the study’s authors find that the coal dust harms the area’s mangrove trees and related ecosystems. They note:

Dust on the undersurface of leaves is not removed by wind, rain, or even physical washing. The undersurface of the leaves, as well as the rough surfaces of twigs, branches and trunk, tend to accumulate dust and appear black.

Coal dust contamination in the area is so widespread and well-known that even the Richards Bay Coal Terminal (RBCT) company acknowledges there’s a problem. In it’s 2006 Annual Report:

RBCT commissioned Annergan Environmental Research to conduct an environmental study on the impact of coal dust at the Zululand Yacht Club in the Richards Bay Small Craft Marina. Results indicated that RBCT was one of the contributing dust factors at the Yacht Club.

Read more

How Real Is the Threat of Coal Dust?

by

Here’s a coal terminal that wants to be a good neighbor:

…a new process the company is implementing to help homeowners deal with coal dust on their property. Residents affected by the dust can now fill out a form and drop it off at the district office to be relayed to RTI.

RTI will then send out a contractor to power wash the coal dust off a homeowner’s property.

Get that? If you’re lucky enough to live near the Prince Rupert coal export facility in northern BC, now you can fill out a form to request that a contractor power wash the coal dust off your house. For free!

Thanks, coal company! Thanks for agreeing to have someone wash off the toxic dirt that you coated my home with!

I’m being sarcastic, but this is no laughing matter: coal dust is well known to harm human health.

If you don’t think coal dust is a problem near export terminals, then take a look at this photo taken in June 2011 near BC’s Ridley Terminal. I’m serious: go look at it.

Read more